Panic Peddling

[stffgpr2003]

I've sent this of to the APP and News Transcript for publication, as I just heard that an absentee landlord from Lakewood, who already owns several rental properties with numerous code violations in the Borough, is seeking to solicit to buy more homes in town.

Marc L

The quick buck is claiming more innocent victims; our privacy at home and our community's well being. A number of slum landlords calling themselves "Realtors" are going door to door throughout local towns intimidating residents into selling them their homes, often for cash. Homeowners refusing to listen to their "panic peddling" have been harassed and threatened with declining property values and diminished quality of life, as it is insinuated that their neighbors have already sold out to the greed and eventual neighborhood blight.

Once owned, many absentee landlords turn beautiful and spacious homes into profit centers, milking them by skirting all but the most critical maintenance costs and by collecting numerous cheap cash rents for overcrowding. As established residents flee from the noise, garbage and bad manners of transient tenants, these despicable opportunists increase their local real estate holdings even faster and cheaper than before.

If you suspect that you are being panic peddled by a shady real estate investor masquerading as a "Realtor," send them away and report any intimidation to your town officials, immediately.

Think about the future of your neighborhood and your town, even if you eventually plan on moving away. Though the temptation of a quick cash sale may be strong, reputable Realtors will market your home for a fair price and will likely attract more desirable buyers looking for a strong community to live within rather than one to dismantle from afar.

Most absentee landlords are not interested in building and preserving strong communities. In fact, it is in their best interest to create a buyer's market pushing out the people, who have a stake in their community. They do this by driving a stake through the community's heart. Don't sell to them.

Marc LeVine
Freehold Borough

[Marc LeVine]

Yes, thank you for noticing that my letter ran, today.

Apparently, the letter immediately spiked some local media interest and, already underway, are a few newsworthy investigative reports that should draw out more specifics, further educate the public about panic peddling and - hopefully - embarrass many of the slumlords, involved in this disgusting practice.

Even more awareness is needed. The Borough's Rental Committee may hold some of the answers, but additional letters/editorials from you would be appreciated to call greater attention to this issue.

Public education, increased awareness and enhanced negative publicity are the worst enemies of shady real estate investors. They count on our ignorance, fear, indifference, selfishness and greed to propagate their seedy business endeavors. When the doors they knock on no longer welcome them, only then are they forced to choose between respectable real estate methods or going elsewhere.

A crackdown on inconsiderate and ordinance violating absentee landlords is now underway in Freehold Borough. With your grass roots support this is an undertaking that will succeed. By eliminating this problem, we can take back our neighborhoods from these people, who don't give a d**n about our town or their neighbors and restore a better quality of life for the rest of us, who enjoy living here and raising our families.

Please write letters to the editors of the Press, Transcript and Star Ledger, today.

Thank you.

Marc L.

[Freehold Resident]

Freehold homeowners are targets for fast transactions
BY CLARE MARIE CELANO
Staff Writer

FREEHOLD - Municipal officials are expected to consider an application for a solicitor's license from a borough property owner who has previously been cited for code violations.

The application is expected to come before the Borough Council on July 17.

Michael Lefkovits, of H&R Realty, Lakewood, applied for a solicitor's license several months ago. According to the application, Lefkovits wants to be able to go door to door and solicit people to sell their property.

In response to issues raised by the borough's Code Enforcement Office and according to municipal records, Lefkovits was found guilty earlier this year of not providing fire extinguishers, not providing smoke detectors, not providing a sewer line and not having a certificate of occupancy in various units for which he is the owner.

In an interview on July 10, Lefkovits, who said he owns units at the Parker House condominiums, Broad Street, said it is not uncommon for people to go door to door to solicit real estate.

He did not directly answer when asked if he thought his previous code violations would have an effect on the council's decision for his solicitation permit.

In a letter he e-mailed to the News Transcript last week, Councilman Marc Le Vine said he is concerned about people going door to door and trying to intimidate residents into selling their homes, often for cash.

Le Vine, who did not name any solicitors in his e-mail, alleged that some homeowners who refuse to listen to what he calls panic peddling, "have been harassed and even threatened with declining property values and diminishing quality of life as it insinuates that their neighbors have already sold out to greed and eventual neighborhood blight."

He charged that many absentee landlords "turn beautiful and spacious homes into profit centers by collecting numerous cheap cash rents [by] overcrowding" people into the home.

Le Vine suggested that if residents suspect they are facing panic peddling, they should report it to borough officials. He asked people to think about the future of their town, even if they are planning to move away.

"Most absentee landlords are not interested in preserving strong communities," Le Vine wrote. "It is in their best interest to create a buyers market by pushing out people who have a stake in the community. Don't sell to them."

First Street resident Sheryl Mott had a personal experience with a door-to-door solicitor asking to buy her grandmother's home where she and her sister reside. She recounted her story at a council meeting last year. She said a man came to her grandmother's home and asked to buy the house.

Mott said the man asked her grandmother, who was sitting on her porch on a Sunday afternoon, if she was interested in selling her house. Mott said the man told her grandmother that he would give her cash immediately.

"My grandmother replied that she was not interested in selling her home," Mott said.

This week, Mott was able to identify Lefkovits as the man who came to her grandmother's house. She said there have been people knocking on doors in her neighborhood making offers to buy homes for cash.

[Marc LeVine]

I understand that this guy owns several Borough properties, including some condos on Broad Street. So, the sewer line was definately at one of his other properties.

Workshops are open public meetings. Public comments are allowed during the regular meeting portion and those wishing to remain throughout the workshop portion may also do so.

At this time, I can not comment on any actions that might be taken at our upcoming meeting. This is simply because each councilperson votes his or her own way. The final vote tally determines the issue's outcome, as you may know.

Thank you.

Marc L.

[admin]

Funny day-- I had read all of the above threads when I opened my mail and found one of those letters claiming to pay me cash within two weekd for my home. Even stranger, the wife and I have been working on contacting realtors in PA to see what we can find out there. If we do sell, I will not do that to my neighbors, they are a good bunch and I will not partake in the demise of this part of town.

[Marc LeVine]

Brian:

Don't leave us now. We finally found a decent soul, who can set an example for others, who really need to be more involved in our town! You are a positive force on the rise!!!

...and if you do happen to go, please make sure you leave someone with the directions for keeping this forum going. We couldn't bare to revisit what we went through when John Anderson, the past webmaster, left left town undercover in darkness of night.

For some of us, this site is a guilty pleasure. It's a great place to discuss town matters in real time with real Freehold Borough people. Hopefully, it will grow to include many more residents.

You have kept it an open and positive experience - great job!

Thanks,

Marc

[leelye]

Marc,


I agree. I too was tempted to move. This state is killing us with taxes, taxes and taxes. I can't wait to see what the Borough is going to hand to us !! Fortunately for you I have deep roots and as long as my folks are around I'll be here.

I also rec'd the infamous Stanley Kelton letter in the mail today. He couldn't afford my price. ;D

I'll go one further, both my sister and I rec'd the same letter from some realtor typed in SPANISH w/o an ENGLISH translation asking if we were interested in selling. Unfortunately, we both were so incensed we ripped the letter up and threw it away. I'm sure there will be more further down the road.

[richardkelsey]

Brian:

I am not advocating moving from Freehold, though many lifelong residents are for many complex reasons. If you do, however, move South or West. Don't pick another high tax, rust belt, quasi-socialist state specializing in taxation and redistribution.

PA is a state with some lovely areas, but it is headed in the wrong direction.

VA, SC, Georgia might be excellent states. WVA is an up and comer too. There are others as well.

My brother tried to convince me that no matter where one goes, the Taxes are about the same -- they just get you for them differently. He is not only wrong, but demonstratively wrong.

The tax burden in Northern Virginia relative to Monmouth County is shockingly low. In addition, the schools, jobs, services, Parks, etc, compare not only favorably, but in many cases the Va system is superior -- by a lot. There are many reasons for that, but most are due to a lack of government and a tremendous synergy of systems. (For example, Fairfax County has one million people, but only one school system. It has the advantage of bulk buying, uniform standards, fewer admin costs. Monmouth County has something like 54 municipalities. Almost all have their own school systems, with layers of administration and separate school Boards. It makes no economic sense, disadvantages certain schools, and is unnecessary. The myth of local control in NJ should be plain after the school budget debacle)

Anyway -- research your move carefully -- voting with your feet is tough -- and you don't want to do it more than once.

I must say -- the real estate prospects for a buyer in Freehold are improving. I looked at some nice properties recently online. As Bon Jovi sings in his new song, "who says, you can't go home."

I hope someone is there that I know -- if I make it back. Lord knows, they need someone to foment revolution in the state -- and well -- I do love to foment.

Marc -- don't you do placement of some kind. Any jobs up there for me? (I ate at sweet lou's last week. I offered to help out on the grill. I think I might still have the skills.)

[admin]

Richard, Thank you for your feedback. I will keep what you said in mind. To be truthful, we are not one hundred percent committed to moving. If we did, I would wish that we could pick up Freehold and put it in another state. The wife and I do love this town.

Our reason for looking at PA is because it would not take us too far away from our families. My mothers family is from Philly and the surrounding are, so I would have the added bonus of becoming reacquainted with family I have lost touch with.

As it is, we are looking on line at houses that are larger than we have now, lower taxes, and for less than what our current house is worth. Of course looking on line does not tell the whole picture. We still have to explore what the areas are like, I will not move into a slum like Long Branch again. The local job market is one we would have to consider, where ever we go.

We will have to wait and see. We are just exploring at this time and will have to see what the future holds. As far as Jersey, I am not an optimist.

Thanks again, Richard

[Marc LeVine]

Letter to Stanley Kelton of Conwest, LLC of Trenton in response to his sending repeated " immediate cash for home" letters to me.


Dear Mr. Kelton:

Yesterday, I received another of your solicitation letters offering immediate cash for my home. Over the past few years I have received many such letters from you, as have all my immediate neighbors. Matter of fact, your mailings have become quite a joke around our town - as well as a major annoyance to most of us.

Coincidentally, I am a Councilman in the Borough of Freehold. Many of our constituents have appealed to the town to ask you to cease and desist sending these letters repeatedly to their homes. While I am not sure if you can be required to stop mailing us, I can certainly respectfully request that you drop our zip code from your future mailings. Certainly, please take my name off your list!

I am not sure, which properties you currently own in our town - if any. Therefore, I am not exactly sure how you maintain them - hopefully, in full compliance with all of our town's ordinances. This is the non-negotiable expectation for all of our property owners.

Let me just tell you what some other cash transaction buyers are doing; why we are concerned; and how we intend dealing with them.

There are a number of other "homes for quick cash" buyers presently going door to door in Freehold Borough. Fortunately, you seem to be only mailing us. Many of these other people already own properties in town with numerous code violations. They seem the least bit interested in our community's well being and have elected to ignore their responsibilities to our town and their neighbors. They mock our courts, pay their violations in pocket cash and charge back their tenants. Our current goals are to gain legal compliance from them and discourage other bad landlords, like them, from setting up shop here. Please see the newspaper article pasted below, dealing with one such individual.

Many absentee landlords have come to Freehold Borough to avail themselves of a housing market that they believe accepts overcrowding homes with the illegal aliens and other transients living here. Often, unreported cash rent is collected for attic, garage and basement dwelling in homes that are not even close to being code compliant.

We are currently at work to make breaking the law much more costly to our property owners, in every possible way. A Rental committee has been established in Freehold Borough to study housing problems and to recommend possible solutions for the governing body to consider. Increased fines for multiple violations; jail time for repeat offenders; the reporting of overcrowding and other violations to the IRS, Insurance companies, and to mortgage companies (which might discover covenant violations that void lending agreements), landlord paid relocation fees for evictions based on overcrowding and landlord reimbursements to our schools for housing the children of illegal immigrants. We can do all these things and much more.

The local newspapers are also showing a unique interest in publishing the names and violations of Borough property owners for all to see. Soon, we be adopting a "No-Knock" list of residents, who do not want solicitors at their doors, for any reason. That should halt our door to door solicitors.

Freehold Borough is a nice town with a very long and impressive history. We are also the County Seat of Monmouth. Many of our original families still reside in town and go back several generations. The newer families that arrived more recently, settled here to seek the benefits of living in a peaceful community, wherein neighbors respect each other's rights and collectively care about their town. We are committed to keeping things this way and are, simply, much more interested in encouraging desirable owner occupied housing in Freehold, while discouraging poorly managed rental properties. We will resist slum housing to our very last breaths.

Again, I do not know anything about you, Conwest LLC or the properties you own in our town. I suppose I can learn more with a search of our files. The real intent of this email was to let you know that many of our residents wish for your mailings to stop. I also wanted to share with you some of our present landlord concerns and the solutions we are considering. These things will definitely put a dent in the business of the bad landlords. If you wish to do business here, it is important that you know this information.

If you wish to discuss this matter further with me. Please feel free to write or call me at 732-866-4077. Thank you.

Regards,

Marc D. LeVine
Councilman
Freehold Borough
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Here is an article that appeared, yesterday:

Freehold homeowners are targets for fast transactions
BY CLARE MARIE CELANO
Staff Writer

FREEHOLD - Municipal officials are expected to consider an application for a solicitor's license from a borough property owner who has previously been cited for code violations.

The application is expected to come before the Borough Council on July 17.

Michael Lefkovits, of H&R Realty, Lakewood, applied for a solicitor's license several months ago. According to the application, Lefkovits wants to be able to go door to door and solicit people to sell their property.

In response to issues raised by the borough's Code Enforcement Office and according to municipal records, Lefkovits was found guilty earlier this year of not providing fire extinguishers, not providing smoke detectors, not providing a sewer line and not having a certificate of occupancy in various units for which he is the owner.

In an interview on July 10, Lefkovits, who said he owns units at the Parker House condominiums, Broad Street, said it is not uncommon for people to go door to door to solicit real estate.

He did not directly answer when asked if he thought his previous code violations would have an effect on the council's decision for his solicitation permit.

In a letter he e-mailed to the News Transcript last week, Councilman Marc Le Vine said he is concerned about people going door to door and trying to intimidate residents into selling their homes, often for cash.

Le Vine, who did not name any solicitors in his e-mail, alleged that some homeowners who refuse to listen to what he calls panic peddling, "have been harassed and even threatened with declining property values and diminishing quality of life as it insinuates that their neighbors have already sold out to greed and eventual neighborhood blight."

He charged that many absentee landlords "turn beautiful and spacious homes into profit centers by collecting numerous cheap cash rents [by] overcrowding" people into the home.

Le Vine suggested that if residents suspect they are facing panic peddling, they should report it to borough officials. He asked people to think about the future of their town, even if they are planning to move away.

"Most absentee landlords are not interested in preserving strong communities," Le Vine wrote. "It is in their best interest to create a buyers market by pushing out people who have a stake in the community. Don't sell to them."

First Street resident Sheryl Mott had a personal experience with a door-to-door solicitor asking to buy her grandmother's home where she and her sister reside. She recounted her story at a council meeting last year. She said a man came to her grandmother's home and asked to buy the house.

Mott said the man asked her grandmother, who was sitting on her porch on a Sunday afternoon, if she was interested in selling her house. Mott said the man told her grandmother that he would give her cash immediately.

"My grandmother replied that she was not interested in selling her home," Mott said.

This week, Mott was able to identify Lefkovits as the man who came to her grandmother's house. She said there have been people knocking on doors in her neighborhood making offers to buy homes for cash.

[admin]

Publius, Thank you for the info. that site is interesting. You are right, the Libertarian in me liked what I saw. ;D

[Marc LeVine]

Editorials August 2, 2006 (The News Transcript)

Strong stand on housing remains key for Freehold

The residents and officials of Freehold Borough once again find themselves on the brink of a potential significant change in the community. It has been well documented over the past several years how an influx of illegal immigrants to the municipality has changed life in the borough.

It may well have been the borough's supply, relatively speaking, of affordable rental housing - compared with a lack of affordable rental housing in the suburban communities that surround Freehold - that made it possible for waves of people to settle in the borough.

The town's apartment complexes and condominiums have become the home to hundreds, if not thousands of newcomers. Residents and officials know this to be true simply by opening their eyes.

The borough is doing what it can to accommodate thousands of residents, including children. A decade ago, this scenario would have been difficult to imagine. Now, it is reality.

Other people are watching what is happening in the borough, too, specifically real estate speculators who see an opportunity to make a profit.

The News Transcript has reported in recent weeks that borough residents have been receiving mail solicitations and door-to-door visits from people who are offering to buy their homes for cash.

Our assumption is that these speculators would replace a family of three, four or five people with what would become a de facto boarding housing occupied by many unrelated people. The potential for profits, and trouble, could be significant.

Municipal officials fired a salvo in this latest battle two weeks ago when the borough clerk denied a solicitation permit to a Lakewood man who wanted the town's permission to go door to door with offers to buy property

The code enforcement department recommended denying the permit based on the man's history of problems at properties he already manages in town. The clerk accepted that recommen-dation and the Borough Council backed the clerk in her decision.

The Lakewood man in question did not appreciate the publicity the News Transcript placed on him. He did not appreciate the borough officials' diligence in using his record of property management problems to deny him a solicitation permit.

Too bad.

We say bravo to Freehold Borough officials. They well understand that at this point in time they can fight to keep the sense of community that has been felt for hundreds of years, or they can let outsiders come in and make the town into something no one wants to see.

Residents who support the actions of the council must let their elected representatives know that they support them. Residents can write letters to newspapers, or they can show up at council meetings and let officials know they have the support of the community.

[Mrc LeVine]

Calliope:

Just wanted to make sure you realized that the editorial you mention was written by Mark Rozman, editor of the News Transcript. It appeared this week. Mark and his staff have been very supportive of Freehold Borough's efforts to protect itself from quality of life threats such as this and illegal immigration negative impact on our town.

I'm not sure how much influence Kevin Coyne can have on NYTimes editorial policy, especially regarding Freehold Borough. His employer made it vey clear that he keep his distance from our local issues. Having worked for the Press, myself, I understand the philosophies of - especially - the newsroom in keeping staff apart from direct involvement in politics of any kind.

However, if some of our residents take up the charge and contact some media outlets, perhaps....

Marc L.

[Newest taxpayer]

Mr. Lefkowitz is no longer affiliated with properties in Freehold Borough. As of now he is responsible for the 1 property he owns. At one point he managed 20 properties but was quickly removed from said properties with a little phone call.

P.S. Glad to see the site up and running again. I felt like i was missing something.

[admin]

Newest Taxpayer, It is good to see you back. That bit of information about Lefkowitz is interesting. I am sure some other person will just take his place.

[Marc LeVine]

Brian:

The glass is half full...

Let's not worry about who replaces this snake. What we learned from this particular situation is that many of these people just can't handle the bad publicity they so deserve and are forced to run for cover (or are asked to exit the stage) when the spotlight shines upon them.

Let's hope the newspapers keep the spotlight on all bad landlords and slimeball solicitors, who only seek to do damage to our town to make a profit.

Marc

[adefonzo]

This thread was another very interesting read. Of course, it's a lot different from the Freehold Laughter Club...in fact, I may need a dose of laughter after reading through all this again...

Just about 2 years ago this thread was started...and it was started for issues that we are still seeing throughout our town.

Yes, the solicitation application was denied back then to the one gentleman who was seeking it...but how many other significant positive changes have occurred to truly deal with the rental situation in town? It's been at least 2 years (and most of us know it's been longer than that)...when do we see results?

What about shining that bright media spotlight on absentee landlords as it was done with Michael Lefkovits?

Perhaps I am just impatient. I get this feeling (and it's all throughout this country, not just here in Freehold) that public figures intentionally drag out issues instead of dealing decisively with them. This dragging out process enables them to lull the public into a deep sleep while the issues never get dealt with. It's a problem that I see throughout America, and it drives me nuts.

But back to Freehold...

As I said...it's been at least 2 years...how much better has our town gotten since then?

[stffgpr2003]

But back to Freehold...

As I said...it's been at least 2 years...how much better has our town gotten since then?

From where I sit, I have seen improvement.

If you are talking about solicitation for rental properties (e.g. blockbusting). I have to give some credit to the poor real estate economy for that. Whatever helps! The "No-Knock" ordinance is also available as just another tool to curb undesirable behaviors of blockbusters and others, who disturb residents that don't want them to come a-knocking.

There is a leveling off on the number of rental properties in town (other related statistics also prove this out), so Levkovits and friends aren't prowling around our streets threatening people to sell to them, as they once were. The "No-Knock Ordinance" is in place and anyone who wants to is welcome to add their names to the list in Borough Hall and report offenders. Not just the real estate "nudges," but anyone else that they don't want to see at your door. Better to have it available, than not (many other towns will agree - see example of another city dealing with the problem).

BLOCK BUSTING AND SOLICITING REAL ESTATE FOR LEASE OR SALE (Baltimore County Code, Sections 10-31 - 10-33)

Definitions

“Canvassing” includes soliciting door-to-door, soliciting by the use of circulars, visits, or any other means where the canvasser or his employer has not been invited or requested by the owner to obtain a listing of the property or to confer about a real estate transaction.

“Owner” includes the lessee ( tenant), sublessee, managing agent, or other person having the right to occupy, sell, rent, or lease any real property.

Soliciting prohibited

It is unlawful to solicit the purchase , sale, or lease of residential property by any kind of canvassing, such as: door-to-door solicitation in person or by telephone, or distribution of circulars, cards, advertisements, etc.

The following are not considered soliciting by canvassing: advertisement by radio, television or in bona fide newspapers of general circulation in the area; literature distributed by U.S. mail; legitimate personal referrals; contacts resulting from the owner having personally advertised the property for sale; collecting market data or information for appraisals

Penalty

A violation of this law is a misdemeanor. Each instance of violation constitutes a separate offense.

A real estate broker or salesman convicted of a violation shall also be referred to the Maryland Real Estate Commission for disciplinary action.


If our ow situation weren't improving, there would be many more complaints from around town from folks that are being harassed by solicitors. And...there shouldn't be, because there is this mechanism in place to discourage and to a larger degree punish those responsible for ignoring the rules. The ordinance is not only a hammer for those, who get caught at the wrong door, but also a deterrent to those that might not want to be hassled dealing with it.

In recent months, several solicitors have come to my door - none were real estate types, though. I have advised all that they require permits to knock on doors and that they need to be aware of our "No-Knock" ordinance. I've then taken their materials and contacted our town to advise them that these people are going door to door without a permit. Some of them looked a bit "seedy" and came from as far away as Philadelphia and Camden. People need to be very careful about talking to these strangers, who may have a completely different kind of agenda from the services they are peddling. westseattleblog.com/blog/?p=6664, www.cityofboise.org/Departments/Police/NewsReleases/2008/page26824.aspx, www.stlouispark.org/special_alerts.htm, bulletin.aarp.org/yourmoney/scamalert/articles/scam_alert__door-to-door.html, www.cocosheriff.org/crime_statistics/crime_alerts/door_to_door_21506.htm

I'll make sure I look into how we can remind our residents that we have such an ordinance in place. As for publishing names of these slum landlord solicitation offenders in the newspapers...we have to know who they are first.

Marc

[adefonzo]

Marc...my point was not that the "no-knock" ordinance was in place...in fact, yes that was one positive deterrent that was put in place.

But in the two years since that thread, have we decreased the number of rental units that are used as "hourly hotels" for day laborers who simply need a mattress to sleep on at night? What have we done to really punish the absentee slum lords who own this property? How many absentee landlords have gone running for the hills because Freehold Boro really started cracking down with some serious punishments for code violations? Admittedly, I know nothing about zoning laws, but is there something that can be done to make it against zoning laws to have a single family house as a rental unit? There are always more things we can do...but we have not done anything, that I can see, to reduce the number of these poorly maintained, blight on our neighborhood rental units.

The "no knock" ordinance may have deterred more homes from becoming hourly hotels, but we have not dealt decisively with the ones that still remain...and once again, this is not a problem that just popped up 2 years ago.

Yes...very recently the council has approved this new committee that will deal with rental issues...but I am sure we will be asked to allow "time for this committee to get a handle on the situation before they can make any suggestions" in regards to the myriad of problems that plague our town.

That's the crux of my complaint...it took at least 2 years for the council to realize that the old committee was not working, which made them form this new committee...and now we have to wait to see what recommendations they make...and then we'll wait some more to see if the Mayor and Council actually act on any of their recommendations

All this time keeps passing by, meanwhile our town, it's infrastructure, and our schools continue to slip further and further into the abyss.

[admin]

Jun 17, 2008 16:06:32 GMT -5 adefonzo said:

Marc...my point was not that the "no-knock" ordinance was in place...in fact, yes that was one positive deterrent that was put in place.

But in the two years since that thread, have we decreased the number of rental units that are used as "hourly hotels" for day laborers who simply need a mattress to sleep on at night? What have we done to really punish the absentee slum lords who own this property? How many absentee landlords have gone running for the hills because Freehold Boro really started cracking down with some serious punishments for code violations? Admittedly, I know nothing about zoning laws, but is there something that can be done to make it against zoning laws to have a single family house as a rental unit? There are always more things we can do...but we have not done anything, that I can see, to reduce the number of these poorly maintained, blight on our neighborhood rental units.

The "no knock" ordinance may have deterred more homes from becoming hourly hotels, but we have not dealt decisively with the ones that still remain...and once again, this is not a problem that just popped up 2 years ago.

Yes...very recently the council has approved this new committee that will deal with rental issues...but I am sure we will be asked to allow "time for this committee to get a handle on the situation before they can make any suggestions" in regards to the myriad of problems that plague our town.

That's the crux of my complaint...it took at least 2 years for the council to realize that the old committee was not working, which made them form this new committee...and now we have to wait to see what recommendations they make...and then we'll wait some more to see if the Mayor and Council actually act on any of their recommendations

All this time keeps passing by, meanwhile our town, it's infrastructure, and our schools continue to slip further and further into the abyss.

Andrew, It is always great to see you hunting down and bringing up old threads. I saw you did that with the laughter club too recently.

This thread is a really good one to reflect on and you bring this back with interesting and good questions. Seeing the progress of past actions is what counts. Have we seen changes with the local rental issues?

I hate to say, but it takes time. Somewhere in another old thread I had posted about Belmar. It was a somewhat recent article and I recall that it took Belmar years before they were able to get a handle on the animal house issues they were facing.

At times on this site, Marc has used the term "wait and see." I am not picking on him with this, but that phrase is a good one and reflects exactly some of the failings of the governing body. I really wish the governing as a whole were more aggressive and proactive. Had they been ten years ago, we may not be where we are today. Go back and read the thread "what would you do." There are two basic philosophies presented there. One is the "wait and see." The other is the proactive approach, which is what I believe in. People can answer the question themselves as to what is working. I believe there are issues out there now that are not being dealt with and will bite our town in the butt because of the lack of proactive solutions being offered.


Back to the rental issues, you are right to bring the questions up. We all have to. This town has to become very proactive on this. What has been sorely lacking is outlets and engagement of those who live around the rentals. From the day the rental recommendation committee read its fifteen points, I have advocated for a public rental board that deals with all the issues. It looks like we are finally getting that. Part of the responsibilities of that board should be putting the code office on the spot and holding them accountable.

We have seen quite a bit for the tenants rights etc, including the very good forum that the HRC hosted. I think what more people are going to attend is the forum that addresses the neighbors and the complaints they have. I think there will be a strong interest for the people who have invested in this town- the home owners.

[stffgpr2003]

Andrew & Brian:

I was a little unclear where Andrew was coming from with his original post, since he dug up the "No-Knock Ordinance" post to comment on. Thanks for the further clarification. It is now more apparent that he was commenting on the entire rental property issue in town, which I agree is still a work in progress that needs continued attention and effort. There is no argument, there.

However, I will say that the town has made significant progress with respect to code enforcement and the implementation of most of the seventeen rental property advisory committee recommendations (two more were added when the former committee met for a progress report last fall).

You are right in saying that our problem with rental properties didn't develop overnight...and it didn't develop, exclusively, in Freehold Borough, either. This problem runs throughout New Jersey and much of the nation. Even in Freehold Township, Stonehurst Apartments has been allowed to deteriorate from having once been a great living community to a group of investor owned "cash milking stations." Misery loves company? Hardly. Reality? I'm afraid so. Is there no outcry over there? There should be! It's a blemish on that town, for sure.

There are many federal and state regulations that need to be overhauled to give communities like Freehold Borough and the township more teeth to deal with these issues. They can start by allowing for higher fines for violators (PASS THE BUCCO BILL WHICH FB SUPPORTED!). We NEED ...stiffer penalties, in general, including jail time for unrepentant slumlords that violate ordinances up the kazoo.

As for the Borough's situation, as a stand-alone? No apologies are owed to anyone based on everything the town has done and is doing to address rental properties situations. The past is the past...anyone want to cry over spilled milk or work towards present day solutions?

Let's face it, there appears to be no silver bullet for an issue like this one, at least - as of now (we're still looking for one, though) -but, there are effective "cocktails," made up of numerous legislative and enforcement measures that have been or are currently being researched, discussed and (many of which)-have been or may be - applied to improve the overall situation.

Remember, Freehold's highly successful RPAC spent more than a full year pouring over Lexis-Nexis to uncover articles from throughout the nation, regarding effective strategies and tools to consider for use. They learned about whatever there was to learn about in dealing with this issue. They also brought in numerous experts from around New Jersey to address our local issues and to make formal recommendations. They did a thorough job. And, as part of the MDRB, they will do even more.

When they were finally released to the public, the Asbury Park Press praised the rental committee's recommendations and, after a horrible fire at a slum property in that town, advised the City of Asbury Park to stop by the Borough and "pick up a copy" of our recommendations to consider.

In fact, Freehold Borough's actions inspired Diane Reaves to approach the Lakewood town council and recommend that they establish their own rental property advisory board. Initially, that town resisted doing this, but they finally acquiesced, I believe.

Granted, it took some time to legally vet and roll out many of the RPAC'srecommendations. For example, code enforcement now has the software up and running to improve their operations. It took some time to research and negotiate for the software it eventually purchased. There were trials, modifications, data migrations and training involved, as well. But, code has it now and it will add value to their operations.

Code is also inspecting all rental properties throughout the town. This is a good thing, but we are doing so with existing staff. They have added Saturday hours to help do more without hiring more people. Saturday surveillance has lead to many successful investigations, by the way.

Increased municipal court revenues have proven that we are on the right track with our efforts.

I won't detail every measure the town has instituted from the RPAC recommendations, but I can say that they are working. I don't expect every bad landlord in town to up and run because of any thing we are doing. These are tough businesspeople, not easily rattled, and many of them are stuck with properties in a bad real estate market. There will always be those that try to evade "a better mouse trap." I know that, too. That is why we must be vigilant and continue to work on the problem.

The number of rental properties has stabilized in town; bulk garbage has too, and so has the school population (if that is a related statistic - it must be to some degree - because of the overcrowding issue). Yes, we want to see a reversal of the numbers and I believe there are ways to accomplish this - in ways that will incent properties to revert to owner occupied. More on this after some questions are answered.

The revamped and revitalized Multiple Dwelling Review Board with its RPAC component will continue to investigate and recommend additional strategies. Code enforcement will pick up any new recommendations that council approves and run with them.

I live here...I don't like what I have seen over the years with these rental properties and there is no way I will ever say it is acceptable for slum landlords and inconsiderate tenants to operate without restraint. I can only speak for myself and even my greatest critics will note that I have not sat still with regard to this issue. I can't solve a national problem, all by myself - but I CAN continue to fight on for a better Freehold Borough. Fortunately, I am not alone. I have some hardworking colleagues and we work with some terrific volunteers and professionals. As for me, though, I will let you know when I think I am licked and I will walk away. That day is far off, I'm afraid. That's bad news for those who continue to violate our property codes.

If you get the chance to read the many recommendations I have received from several respected businesspeople, who have known me over the years, you will see that I don't quit until I get results. That's just me. And, we all need to work together to accomplish what we want.

And, no Brian, I am not a "wait and see" kind of guy - except with respect to the 287g issue. I am not a maniac, either. I take calculated risks and don't shoot from the hip - not as an elected official, whose bargaining chips belong to the taxpayers. I think that the others that serve with me are also and recognize the need to be creative, but somewhat pragmatic and thoughtful leaders.

I hope you will be there for support as we all move ahead and to agree to get your hands dirty when needed, too. This should not EVER be made into a political issue, because we need it to be a GRASSROOTS issue to defeat the "bad guys," who expect to "sneakily" thrive, while others argue with one another. We must ALL be up their "tushes" every minute, every day and expect compliance and respect for our town and its neighborhoods. Thanks.

Marc

[admin]

And, no Brian, I am not a "wait and see" kind of guy - except with respect to the 287g issue. I am not a maniac, either, I take calculated risks and don't shoot from the hip - not as an elected official, whose bargaining chips belong to the taxpayers.


I wasn't singling you out with that phrase. It is just one that you have used. In context it is simply a method the governing body on the whole apperas to use too often.